You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Our projects live in for example a path called /platform
And then we have /platform/System (git repo)
/platform/Modules/Core (git repo)
/platform/Modules/Web (git repo)
codebase-memory-mcp refuses to index this as one project (saying path too broad)
My workaround is setting up a separate path containing hard links to everything and then indexing THAT, which is cumbersome and really unworkable at scale.
It looks like there's a hard coded check where if the path element is a single crumb like 'platform' versus like /opt/platform, it will outright reject this. And it looks like there's no way to override this via options or env variables.
Current main intentionally classifies a one-component POSIX path such as /platform as CBM_WS_DENY_TOO_SHALLOW, and it currently makes that verdict non-overridable. That means this is a real capability gap, but the existing behavior is a security guard rather than a Windows-specific parser bug. I have corrected the labels accordingly.
PR #2017 is the active implementation proposal. Because it introduces an override for a workspace safety refusal, we need more time to review the policy boundary before accepting a public mechanism. Please do not treat that PR as pre-approved yet. Thank you for raising the legitimate sibling-repository use case.
Activity
DeusData commentedon Sep 3, 2026
Thank you for the concrete layout and workaround.
Current
mainintentionally classifies a one-component POSIX path such as/platformasCBM_WS_DENY_TOO_SHALLOW, and it currently makes that verdict non-overridable. That means this is a real capability gap, but the existing behavior is a security guard rather than a Windows-specific parser bug. I have corrected the labels accordingly.PR #2017 is the active implementation proposal. Because it introduces an override for a workspace safety refusal, we need more time to review the policy boundary before accepting a public mechanism. Please do not treat that PR as pre-approved yet. Thank you for raising the legitimate sibling-repository use case.